gluckez

you can go play ksp1.... And as for the inflation argument, inflation is something that occurs over time. look at nba 2k, 10 years ago the game was 30$, this years standard edition is 70$. ksp1 in early access was 20$, now it's 50$, and it will remain 50$ for the full release as well. it's not greed, developers also need to be able to afford to live, companies need to be able to afford servers and electricity, and all those prices have inflated as well.

well, then why didn't they just get a refund and go play a different game? my problem isn't that there's negativity, it's just that people seem to be very persistent at it. I'm pretty sure people who are still complaining, instead of just playing a different game would be the same people who would find anything else to complain about, even if it was perfect. nobody is forcing you to play a game. and as for the 50$, just face the fact that that is normal now. bg3 was 60$ in early access. and 10 years ago you would pay 30$ for a AAA title's full release. it's called inflation. so if you really really really hate it, then go play something else. if you don't, then go play the game and report bugs so the devs have more data to work with and improve the game. but for the love of god, stop bringing up the same old arguments over and over again, I'm so sick and tired of hearing the same old excrements. I get it, you're not happy, you lost 50$ and the world now sucks, can we leave it at that?

about how you think the game sucks? that's on purpose, because I disagree. I'm not gonna get into an argument about that again, only toxic people keep starting the same argument over and over again.

nah, it's definitely reddit. There's also people who have a little bit of patience, understand what "early access" means and are enjoying themselves. but there's also a bunch of toxic people who will downvote anything related to the game, and go to forums dedicated to a specific game to rant about it instead of just playing something they do like.

So openness to you means explaining yourself every tiny step of the way? showing every line of code you add constantly? working with a camera pointed at your face? For a dev team, they are extremely transparent, you won't find any like this. So you can't possibly say they're not transparent, that would be a gross exaggeration. what exactly do you mean with "specifics"? the exact lines of code that would change in the game? If they knew that, they would've already written it, that's something you can't predict as you're designing a feature.

This doesn't, at all, contradict what I said about their openness. My comment about their openness was about the progress they are making, about what will be in patches, and about the fact that you can communicate with them directly here and in other places. What more do you want? You want them to come hold your hand while you decompile the code so you can verify that, yes, there are in fact locked features in the game? You want them to come to you personally, and sit down with you and explain to that one kid in class that didn't hear it, why they're doing it this way? What is there to "just believe", did you not get proof of anything ever? so no screenshots and gameplay? no ama's? no countless dev diaries, explaining exactly what they are doing and what they are paying attention to?

It's been explained many times before. It is in this state, because the developers want the bugs out of the foundation of the game so they have a stronger foundation to build the features on. it's very simple actually. just because you don't accept that, doesn't mean there is no answer. Also, we have a pretty good idea of what science will look like, as well as the rest of the features. Science will be very similar to how it was in ksp1, but there is still room for changes, as the feature is currently not enabled for the public.

@Anth12 I had a very similar issue, with an entirely different craft. i used this exact craft: https://kspbuilds.com/build/SATURN-V-:-Apollo The docking port of the landing module is attached to the engine of the return module, but I did reconfigure the ship before I transferred to the mun, so both docking ports worked fine at that point. eventually, I had to get Jeb on EVA and transfer him like that because there was simply no way to dock. Besides that, the only bug I found was that the return module was spinning out of control when trying to point to the target, it seems both vessels "thought" they were already docked together, because I could select "control from here" on a vessel I was targetting. maybe that last part could be a clue as to why docking didn't work, maybe the docking port that was originally attached to the engine, thought it was never decoupled to begin with. Not sure, but it could be a clue.

yes, there's lots of people here and the people doing the actual developing of the game, are busy doing the actual developing of the game. and most of the time I wouldn't answer either if someone is just ranting about something tiny.

wow, you know I left the ksp subreddit exactly because of how toxic of a community it had become, I would hate to do the same here. Some people really only see the worst of the worst, and if there is even one tiny bug in a game, you'll never hear the end of it. They bring up arguments like "back in ancient history, the EA was only 15$ and wasn't as buggy". Well, back in ancient history, there were no features in that game either, and every game you bought, EA or not, costed less than half of what you would pay for the modern equivalent. look at NBA2K for example, back in 2013, that game was listed at about 30$, this years version the standard edition is 70$. neither were EA. so KSP1 in EA was half the price of a AAA title full release. Baldurs Gate 3 was 60$ early access. stop using that as an argument, that's just how it is now in almost every studio. that's inflation for ya. You can talk straight to the devs right here on this forum, you are informed of patches on twitter, here and on steam, as well as what is included in the patches and what they are still working on, and if there are any delays. communication is better than 99% of other developers. This is only true for that small toxic part of the community that seems to bleed in everywhere. plenty of people are still optimistic, including myself. but we just leave places where it's starting to become toxic. Like I said, I literally left the ksp subreddit, where I had spent years of my time, because I got so sick of the toxicity. I can understand if YOU have no hope, if YOU have no incentive to continue participating, if YOU have lost your passion, but don't speak for others. There has been many promises made by the team, and there's been many sneak peeks of those promises as well. you act like nothing has been done, but don't know what's happening behind the scenes or what features are included but just disabled until the foundation is strengthened. I know for a fact those features are already there, and I wish I could enable them and play them now, but I'll just have to be patient like everyone else.

I'd like to see someone do it, I'm not patient enough xD I have a probe on an escape trajectory, but it will take a little under 300000 years before it exits kerbol's SOI.

what's broken about them? haven't noticed anything

it makes sense that less and less bugs are getting fixed. you're not gonna add extra bugs to fix, and the ones that were done from the start were most likely the easiest ones to fix, so you could do more of them faster. now it's probably harder bugs that aren't as easy to reproduce and fix. there's probably a lot of work that has been done towards optimizing the game as well, things that are important for the quality of the codebase and future features.

that's great, but honestly, if it's just something cosmetic like that I don't mind at all. I think heating, wobbliness and science should be prioritized, but I guess that's not up to me xD. The game is perfectly playable as it is.

well... for those saying this game is "totally unplayable". I just landed a mun base under the mun arch without quicksaves or bugs. it was just kinda weird to see the fairing drop straight down after deploying but, oh well. .. And to the devs: props, great work! it was smooth sailing all the way. EDIT: I also noticed these weird round payload structures, are those new? looks really useful to strut things to, but I wish I could attach them to decouplers.

exactly, ksp1 had something similar with asteroids, so something like that would be really cool.

I very much like this idea, it adds to the immersion imo. But I also think there should be a setting to disable it if you're not interested in that.

I do believe that logging bugs helps with the development of the game, and that coming up with ideas may inspire the developers to take a different approach when implementing features that are already on the roadmap. The truth is, you can't satisfy every single player, but the fact that they did put up that bug tracker means you do have some power. I also think the devs should try to stick closely to the roadmap they put up, and not get distracted by what some people in the community are demanding. It does actually. They're very transparent about the fact that it's going to be delayed, but as a developer I understand how difficult it can be to estimate how long it can take to get a fix out. If you promise it's going to be done in a week, you'll get excrements if you don't get it done in time. yes, It doesn't matter how long they've existed, but the fact that they're actively used.

This, absolutely. it's something that we should definitely credit Private Division for. The very fact that we have these forums, can interact directly with the dev team, get updates on what the status is of current workitems and can log bugs. They get a lot of crap when something isn't working or isn't finished but they should get credit when they do something right as well. But I'm not convinced that they should sell the franchise, that won't benefit anyone. you would have a less experienced studio with the responsibility of managing expectations like this...

no, my point was to say that first they promised to deliver within a year. was what I originally said, and the guy countered saying:

[Snip] As per the wikipedia article: "Kerbal Space Program 2 was announced at Gamescom 2019 on August 19, with an initial release date set for early 2020." = a year or even less. no.. and that's not even remotely what I said. those 3-5 devs don't need to have meetings with scientists in different fields, they don't need to deal with management and constantly changing team structures. they don't need to deal with junior developers causing merge conflicts or breaking changes, and they don't need to deal with architects leaving the project or anything like that. There's a point I made earlier about how all of this also affects time to market, I don't think it quite got through...

that's exactly my point. and the smart thing to do is to not promise to management that you can do it in x days if you know for a fact there could be delays.

[Snip] I never claimed to know exactly what happened internally. The things I listed that I know happened internally came from wikipedia, the other things, relating to software development in general and how it actually works, came from my own experience. I wouldn't call it a "measurement" by a long shot. Saying the game is going to be done in a year is not a measurement, and it didn't help the customer in any way. We do stick to small teams... every project I worked in is limited to a max of 15 people, and even that's big for a team. And there's been plenty of studies done around this, like this one: link or this one: link It's even in the scrum guide link

a force exerted by a machine or in a process. (as is the definition of effort in a technical context) But as to the requirement "doesn't include the concept of time".. everything that relates to a process, or has moving parts, is subject to time. effort does not negate time, and something that costs a lot of effort, will likely also cost a lot of time, unless you have some brain cells, and you first put effort into simplifying the process, or creating tools that help with that process. If you need to move a piano, that's a great effort, but if you first put wheels under it it's a lot easier. So when someone asks you, how long will it take you to move the piano, you take into account the effort it takes to go to the store and buy wheels, and then install them. but you don't take into account the fact that there might be a delay because the store ran out of wheels, or you got stuck in traffic. that's why software developers estimate terms of effort, not time.

[Snip] that still doesn't change the fact that software developers estimate based on effort... Also, software developers have this joke: A product owner is someone who believes 9 women can deliver a baby in 1 month. more people != faster development. otherwise, you could create a reddit group of a million people, ask each one to write one line of code, and you'd be done, right?